Silver Task Force Teleconference

26 Jan 2018


sloandr, Jan, jaeunjemmku


WCAG - Gaming standards comparison

<scribe> scribe: jeanne

Thomas: Group is working on a gap analysis of WCAG compared to the Gaming Accessibility Guidelines
... [slide deck]

Charles: Are there industry rules for gaming accessibility?

Thomas: No, I was referring to game-play rules

David: Are you also looking at the format of WCAG 2, the way that the success criteria are laid out.
... are you exploring that as well?

<jemma> http://gameaccessibilityguidelines.com/

Thomas: We are discussing it in the paper we are writing. GAG are divided into basic, advanced. It's not the same structure as A, AA, AAA.

David: That would be valuable to know how the feature set of gaming accessibility is presented to different audiences.

Thomas: We are submitting the paper to ICCHP, extended abstract and preliminary analysis. Paper due in mid-March.
... we have a survey where we are expecting most of the Task Force to respond.

Invitation responses

Shawn: I have sent out more invitations, I need to follow up with the people I haven't heard from.

<Jan> Shawn: Has a tentative yes from Matt King and has other invites out.

<Jan> Jan will send out invite to Don Johnston and try to get their lead developer, Kevin Johnston to attend.

Jan: I am following up with Kevin Johnston since Martin is not available to attend. Kevin is the lead developer for Don Johnston which makes assistive tech similar to TextHelp\

Research updates

<Jan> Jeanne: We would like to have all of the research done and written up so that we can give it to the participants of the design sprints by March 1st.

<Jan> Dave: Mike shared some information last week that was useful

<Jan> ... I will provide a meta analysis of the research that has been done so that we can determine what would be helpful to the participants

<Jan> Something like, names, titles, description of the research that has been addressed, questions asked, etc.; I would be prepared to create something like that if it would be useful in helping them get an overview of the research.

<Jan> Jeanne: That would be helpful to the participants in the design sprint and also to AGWG.

<Jan> Dave: WCAG usability survey that has been out for a while - has more than 200 responses; I will do an analysis of the responses

<Jan> ... asked questions about individual SCs and asked people to respond to them.

<Jan> Jeanne: The results may have an impact on the problem statements.

<Jan> ... I would put that as a higher priority than the overall spreadsheet because we may have to adjust the problem statements, based on those results.

<Jan> Dave: I am stuck a bit because of the translated versions of the surveys; the technical efforts to get the translated versions into survey monkey has been challenging, so we have not released some of the surveys yet; we still need to review some of the translated files

<Jan> ... French, Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese, Japanese, Korean - these are the languages we need help reviewing.

<Jan> Jemma: I will get the Korean version to you tomorrow.

<Jan> Dave: We don't need help with the language, it's more checking the syntax of the files - we need to check file structure and checking the outputs in survey monkey to make sure the files have been provided appropriately

<scribe> ACTION: Dave to write up instructions for finishing the translations

<trackbot> Error finding 'Dave'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/track/users>.

<scribe> ACTION: sloandr to write up instructions for finishing the translations

<trackbot> Created ACTION-153 - Write up instructions for finishing the translations [on David Sloan - due 2018-02-02].

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne (with Imelda) to work on translation files be exactly correctly formatted

<trackbot> Created ACTION-154 - (with imelda) to work on translation files be exactly correctly formatted [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2018-02-02].

<Jan> Jemma: I would recommend using a translation tool instead of using a text editor.

<jemma> https://poedit.net/

<Jan> Jeanne: Kelsey and I worked on the conformance survey that she volunteered to lead; we found that the questions were not in good shape yet, so we worked on them for about 4 hours.

<Jan> ... we have a new document


<Jan> Jeanne: Please look at it and comment

<Jan> ... we tried to determine the format of the responses might be - we are not completely happy with all of it; we need comments by next Tuesday.

Problem Statements

<Jan> Jemma: What is my next job with respect to research because my researcher is done.

<Jan> Jeanne: When they finish a pubication, we want to know about it and we want to know when we can talk about the research publicly

<Jan> ... if you could ask your researcher what the relevant points are so that we can include some of her research in the design sprint, that would be very helpful

<Jan> Shawn: Are we asking someone to go through the paper, pull out the information that we want to use in the design sprint and then send that information back to the researcher to ask her is we can use these points from her paper during the design sprint.

<Jan> *if

<Jan> Jeanne: Someone else needs to extract the information from the paper, send it to Jemma and then Jemma will communicate with the researcher.

<scribe> ACTION: Shawn to review the Loiacano paper and extract the information for the Design Sprint

<trackbot> Created ACTION-155 - Review the loiacano paper and extract the information for the design sprint [on Shawn Lauriat - due 2018-02-02].

<Jan> Jeanne: Dave is going to develop a wiki page with instructions for the translators

<Jan> Charles: Let's start with the maintenance problem statements

<Jan> Flexibility: The feeling is that the standard is inflexible

<Jan> Charles: organizations do not publish according to what can be done, they do so according to what the standards say

<Jan> ... limiting people with disabilities from the process may lead to excluding various audiences

<Jan> ... being more flexible with process could lead to updates happening in a more timely manner

<Jan> ... "cannot be prescriptive of a solution in an opportunity statement - I don't think we should state how to solve the problem in the statement itself.

<Jan> Shawn: We are going to face difficult conversations and some defensiveness, but we have to address active participation

<Jan> Charles: I am not trying to imply that people with disabilities are not involved, but because of the process, it's limiting.

<Jan> Shawn: This language does not point fingers at anyone, it just highlights challenges in participation that are a side-effect of how things are done

<Jan> Jeanne: I think we need to have a statement about the breadth of disabilities are so vast that it's difficult to represent every disabilities; some of the tools used in the process make it difficult for some populations of people with disabilities to participate.

<Jan> Charles: Governance - accessibility guidelines don't keep up with trends in technology and policy

<Jan> ... no immediate path to contribute to the process because of the perceived complexity; the breadth of participation can be perceived as limiting.

<Jan> ... no formalized process to deprecate

<Jan> Shawn: Primary lag is that accessibility guidelines don't keep up with technology and the Secondary lag is that people reference older versions of the guidelines

<Jan> Jeanne: I looked at this differently; if we are talking about deprecating individual items from version to version - I think that we can do that and then reference older versions

<Jan> Charles: Example: HTML5 lifts items from previous versions of HTML that have been deprecated; we need to consider removing deprecated practices from previous versions of the guidelines; the guidelines need to have more longevity - accessiblity guidelines can't deprecate techniques that reference certain technologies if there is any use of them ... deprecating for accessibility guidelines has a longer timeline than deprecating something in HTML, etc.

<Jan> Jeanne: WCAGWG chose not to change anything in 2.0 when they were updating 2.1

<Jan> Charles: The purpose of the problem statement is to define current shortcomings without leading to solutions.

<Jan> Charles: The issue of being difficult to read ... leads to ignoring the guidelines.

<Jan> Jeanne: Link between ambiguity and web applications: WCAG 2 was written before dynamic applications, it is ambiguous to apply the SCs to the new situations we see in dynamic content; we should consider how to structure Silver so that it's easier to apply the guidance to new technology and develop without having to change the guidance.

<jemma> regarding literature review agenda. It would still be the same. I will try to share conformance literature review draft around mid Feb so that it can be shared at design studio on March

<Jan> Jeanne: Are we going to remove the conformance research and put that in a separate document?

<Jan> Jemma: Yes, we can put it in another document that I can share

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Dave to write up instructions for finishing the translations
[NEW] ACTION: jeanne (with Imelda) to work on translation files be exactly correctly formatted
[NEW] ACTION: Shawn to review the Loiacano paper and extract the information for the Design Sprint
[NEW] ACTION: sloandr to write up instructions for finishing the translations

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2018/01/26 16:03:39 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152  of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Present: sloandr Jan jaeunjemmku
Found Scribe: jeanne
Inferring ScribeNick: jeanne

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 26 Jan 2018
People with action items: dave imelda jeanne shawn sloandr with

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]